Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations provide only generic false hints, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the tool returns survey_id and a price estimate, that nothing is charged until launch, and that it creates only an empty draft. This goes beyond the annotations and gives the agent a clear picture of side effects and billing behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, the workflow is compactly listed, and the return and billing information is delivered in a single closing sentence. Every clause earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple 5-parameter draft-creation tool, the description is complete: it states the operation, the workspace context, the follow-up workflow, the return payload, and the billing implication. There is no output schema, but the description covers what the agent needs to know about the result.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and each parameter has a descriptive explanation in the schema. The description itself adds no parameter-level details beyond saying 'empty draft survey' and the workflow. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema already documents all parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Create an empty draft survey in the active workspace.' The term 'empty draft' clearly distinguishes it from siblings like create_survey_from_template, create_survey_from_question, and clone_survey. The subsequent workflow names the exact tools involved, leaving no ambiguity about what this tool does.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly indicates when to use this tool: at the start of a survey-building workflow. It even enumerates the recommended next steps (add_question, set_targeting, preview_survey, launch_survey). It does not explicitly contrast with create_survey_from_template or other alternative creation paths, so it stops just short of explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.